Amarasinghe and Another v. Rev. Sumathiratne and Another – sllr 2003 volume 3 page 337

In the case between Amarasinghe and Another (petitioners/victims) and Rev. Sumathiratne and Another (accused/respondents), the court addressed the issue of whether the High Court trial judge misapplied the legal burden of proof in a grave sexual abuse case, particularly where a mandatory minimum sentence was at stake. It was held that the trial judge applied an impermissibly elevated burden of proof, leading to a miscarriage of justice. The legal principle reaffirmed was that the standard of proof in criminal cases is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and any deviation constitutes a substantial legal error. This decision relied on established legal standards governing criminal trials, underscoring that proper judicial application of the burden of proof is essential to the fair administratio